Fred Bone wrote:
> On 13 Sep 2001 at 17:50, Reitzel, Charlie wrote:
> > Hi Allen,
Spellcheck
> > You are not the first to raise this sensible point. However, Tidy strikes a
> > sometimes uneasy balance between the HTML specs -plural- and what browsers
> > actually do. If there is a general rule, it might be stated, "1) Parse any
> > and all markup to the degree possible. 2) Emit spec compliant HTML that
> > renders the same on most browsers as the non-compliant input." A bit messy,
> > yes. But I think that's what makes Tidy useful.
> >
> > Further, the spec does not directly address nesting <form> tags within
> > various table tags (<table>, <tr>, <td>). According to the HTML 3.2 DTD,
> > <form> tags are not allowed at all within a table. Only <tr>'s are allowed
> > within <table>'s and only text elements are allowed within a <td>.
>
> Quote from the 3.2 reference spec:
>
> > <!ELEMENT (th|td) - O %body.content>
>
> That includes FORMs.
>
> > <form>
> > is a block level tag. HTML 4 requires an additional intervening TBODY tag.
> > So we are already playing fast and loose w/ the spec. My only suggestion
> > was to move the line over one notch - you've got to draw it somewhere.
>
> TBODY is optional (implied) and has no effect on the permitted content
> of TD.
>
> In both 3.2 and 4, you can nest a TABLE in a FORM or a FORM in a TD. You
> can't have one block-level element overlapping another. (And you can't
> have a FORM in a TD that's inside a FORM).
Does this show that the text Tidy is correcting is indeed
non-compliant? Not just ambiguous but non-compliant, which requires
tidy to clean it to be compliant to either 3.2 or 4.0 ?
In past, I've made each row of a table into a form
(<tr><form...>...</form></tr>) but this is illegal? What is the
alternative, so that I have table rows of data that can be modified by
replacing the data in the table cells and clicking a "Edit" (submit)
button on the end ? I have found this very easy for non-tech users to
grasp.
Allan